I agree: we need to reverse it to make it an experiment: reduce CO2 and see if we get the opposite effect. Just adding more CO2 and seeing more warming and less radiation escaping to space proves nothing.

Right, our CO2 use isn't an experiment now because it's not controlled or in the words of Fair Game, we need to reverse it to make it an experiment. The experiment has never been done. No experimental emissions or absorption of CO2 and the atmosphere has ever been shown to create even the smallest measurable global climate change.

<quoted text>BINGO! This point has been made so well and so many times, yet Brian is non-responsive and will forever be.Refusal to acknowledge refutations IS a defacto concession. Brian HAS conceded. He's either too intellectually dishonest to do so explicitly (hypothesis #1), too irrational to process hos defeat (hypothesis #2), too well compensated to do so or go away (hypothesis #3), or some combo.What percentage breakdown would you estimate applies?

My best estimate would be that #3 is most important,#1 next,#2 least. I don't think he's irrational, he's just a paid liar. JMO.

After all,

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it!" --Upton Sinclair

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.